Only time will tell what President Obama’s legacy will be; honestly, there are a lot of options on the table. But one thing he has worked very hard to avoid is being labeled as a President who went to war with radical Islam. Through his own words and the actions of his administration, our Commander-in-Chief has taken every opportunity to avoid admitting a war between the United States of America and any Muslim faction or organization. Evidence of this can be seen in the recent response to the Orlando massacre; only now there is hardly an attempt to hide what is happening.
This past weekend marked two weeks since a shooter entered an Orlando nightclub, shooting over 100 people and killing half as many. Although early reports that the shooter was Muslim and how that dictated his actions may have been debated, I no longer believe that fact is open to debate. 911 communication records clearly show the shooter claiming his devotion and announcing his actions were in support of ISIS. The Police investigation, though still in its early stages, confirms the shooter’s ties to radical Islam and previous statements supporting his beliefs. Finally, survivors of the rampage confirmed the shooter’s statements to the 911 operator as well as other unrecorded statements of a similar nature. But that is not enough for the current administration and, if key members have their way, it will not even be part of official reports.
The current administration is no longer content with reminding Americans that the actions of one Muslim do not mean that all Muslims are at war with America. Nor is the current administration willing to continue pointing out that ISIS is not representative of all Muslims, or even that ISIS is at war with other Muslim nations as well. Instead, the answer is to deny any connection to radical Islam by erasing any reference connecting it to Orlando. Don’t believe me? Consider the words of Attorney General Loretta Lynch.
A joint Department of Justice and FBI transcript of the attack had omitted several key phrases involving the shooter’s pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and the Islamic State. During repeated interviews, the Attorney General claimed the editing was being done to prevent “furthering his propaganda” and “to avoid revictimizing” the families and survivors. FBI Director James Comey referred to the shooter’s statements as “inflammatory and contradictory.”
It is true that the investigation thus far has not uncovered a direct connection between the shooter and ISIS. Nor has there been any evidence that ISIS played any part in providing plans, funds or equipment necessary to carry out the attack. However, the same investigation has also failed to find any direct evidence contradicting the shooter’s claims of support for ISIS or statements indicating he carried out the attacks because of his belief in ISIS.
Bottom line is the shooter himself made repeated claims of his support for ISIS. ISIS quickly took credit for the attacks and praised the shooter for furthering the Islamic cause. Whether this was an ISIS-planned and financed event or the work of a lone wolf believer, the end result is the same – radical Islamic beliefs were at the core of the shooter’s murderous behavior and the public has a right to hear that.
Disclaimer: The content in this article is the opinion of the writer and does not necessarily reflect the policies or opinions of US Patriot Tactical.
Latest posts by Tom Burrell (see all)
- Electrolytes vs. Water – 10 July, 2018
- How to Choose the Right Hydration Unit – 6 July, 2018
- FirstNet: The Future of First Responder Communications – 29 June, 2018